If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Oh, your quite tricky with that bold type. You must be really smart. It seems to me that the approach President Bush has used has been pretty effective.I don't think. Ha Ha Ha where do come up with such great material. Your a regular Don Rickles

It depends on what the definition of the word effective is.

If by effective you mean preventing another terrorist attack on the CONUS, then you may be right, or wrong. Truth of the matter is we don't know for sure what was prevented or disrupted and what role the folks at GITMO had or didn't have in the prevention or disruption, if it did or did not happen.

If by effective you mean IAW the Constitution that he was sworn to uphold, protect and defend against ALL enemies, foreign and domestic, maybe, maybe not, depending on how you look at it.

Few, even the arch-neo-more-to-the-right-than-Barry-Goldwater types on this board, would willingly point to what we have done at GITMO as a shining example of what is known and revered around the world as American justice. GITMO is a great stain on the National morality. We are expected to be, and should be, better than that. Keeping people behind bars for years on end without the benefit of counsel or charges are things authorized by two-bit, tin-horn dictators, not the President of the United States of America. The greatest example of the level of justice present in a society is the justice it provides to those that would seek to destroy it.

If by effective you mean preventing another terrorist attack on the CONUS, then you may be right, or wrong. Truth of the matter is we don't know for sure what was prevented or disrupted and what role the folks at GITMO had or didn't have in the prevention or disruption, if it did or did not happen.

If by effective you mean IAW the Constitution that he was sworn to uphold, protect and defend against ALL enemies, foreign and domestic, maybe, maybe not, depending on how you look at it.

Few, even the arch-neo-more-to-the-right-than-Barry-Goldwater types on this board, would willingly point to what we have done at GITMO as a shining example of what is known and revered around the world as American justice. GITMO is a great stain on the National morality. We are expected to be, and should be, better than that. Keeping people behind bars for years on end without the benefit of counsel or charges are things authorized by two-bit, tin-horn dictators, not the President of the United States of America. The greatest example of the level of justice present in a society is the justice it provides to those that would seek to destroy it.

Kind Regards,

Joe S.

I don't know If would regard Gitmo as a great stain on our nation. To buy that I would also have to buy into the camp that believes 9/11 was our fault. It is what it is and it is the only solution to detainment of terror suspects we have come up with.

It is interesting to note that GW has been trying to figure a way out of Gitmo, and has run into the same quandary the Obama team has. How do they do it without having to create new law and without releasing terrorists onto the American public.

Personally I am more concerned with my friends they are trying to kill and my homeland they want to destroy.

Were they guilty at the time or did they take up arms upon their release after they were hed captive and waterboarded?

Timing Really Is Everything Regards,

Joe S.

That is easy enough to find out on your own. If you find a case where an insurgent that was released from Gitmo, later KIA against coalition troops in the middle east, and was not involved in something prior to Gitmo . I am sure you will return and post it.

Give every detainee a map of such dandy locations to choose from to re-locate:

St.Anthony ID.; Fredricksburg, VA.; Yardley, PA. and all over the Green Mountain state.

I agree with Joe, there is no way we can know how nice these guys could be. Without having a timely trial, they have been enduring way too much for a basic terrorist. Oops...let's see now, while I'm not an attorney, nor do I play one of TV...even I could issue one of those "get-out-for-free" cards based on the ultimate problem...no one read them their rights!

I can hardly wait for UBL's trial. Hope his captors Mirandize him. Actually I think he's looking forward to living in a prison...can't possible be worse than the rat holes he's been forced to hide in the past 6 years...that is if you believe he's still alive.

UB

When the one you love becomes a memory, that memory becomes a treasure.

I don't know If would regard Gitmo as a great stain on our nation. To buy that I would also have to buy into the camp that believes 9/11 was our fault. It is what it is and it is the only solution to detainment of terror suspects we have come up with.

Like I said, "few." Thanks for making my point.

It is interesting to note that GW has been trying to figure a way out of Gitmo, and has run into the same quandary the Obama team has. How do they do it without having to create new law and without releasing terrorists onto the American public.

He is now that the SCOTUS has ruled, REPEATEDLY, that holding people at GITMO without counsel or charges for years on end is unconstitutional. I'm sure you will recall that the original position of President Bush and his Ace #1 Legal Team was the courts couldn't even REVIEW the cases.

Yes, I can see it may be problematic to craft a new law dealing with a situation like this, especially when you have been used to ignoring those laws that you found inconvenient. But, let's face it, the guys in GITMO weren't going anywhere so IF a new law had to be developed, they had the time.

Well, see, that is the trouble with GITMO. Those at GITMO were, I thought, supposed to be the worst of the worst. Hard core. Steely-eyed killers. The core of the islamofas-movement. One would think there would be substantial evidence to support that claim, evidence that was not obtained under duress. Guess not, huh.

Personally I am more concerned with my friends they are trying to kill and my homeland they want to destroy.

So, to be clear, it is OK with you to deny others due process as long we are the good guys. Right?

Give every detainee a map of such dandy locations to choose from to re-locate:

St.Anthony ID.; Fredricksburg, VA.; Yardley, PA. and all over the Green Mountain state.

I agree with Joe, there is no way we can know how nice these guys could be. Without having a timely trial, they have been enduring way too much for a basic terrorist. Oops...let's see now, while I'm not an attorney, nor do I play one of TV...even I could issue one of those "get-out-for-free" cards based on the ultimate problem...no one read them their rights!

I can hardly wait for UBL's trial. Hope his captors Mirandize him. Actually I think he's looking forward to living in a prison...can't possible be worse than the rat holes he's been forced to hide in the past 6 years...that is if you believe he's still alive.

UB

I don't think I ever said these were nice guys. Nor did I suggest they should all be set free. All I said was that they should receive the same rights as others in the legal system. That is the problem with trying to have a conversation with guys like you, Bill, you cannot deal with what is said and to make your point you have to twist the words into what you want them to say. To twist my words as you did makes them inaccurate.

Now, you want to debate what I said, bring it on, but don't twist my words to make your point. That is beneath you.

Actually, I hope a team of my friends from inside the compound at Ft. Bragg find UBL and deal with him.

He is now that the SCOTUS has ruled, REPEATEDLY, that holding people at GITMO without counsel or charges for years on end is unconstitutional. I'm sure you will recall that the original position of President Bush and his Ace #1 Legal Team was the courts couldn't even REVIEW the cases.

Yes, I can see it may be problematic to craft a new law dealing with a situation like this, especially when you have been used to ignoring those laws that you found inconvenient. But, let's face it, the guys in GITMO weren't going anywhere so IF a new law had to be developed, they had the time.

Well, see, that is the trouble with GITMO. Those at GITMO were, I thought, supposed to be the worst of the worst. Hard core. Steely-eyed killers. The core of the islamofas-movement. One would think there would be substantial evidence to support that claim, evidence that was not obtained under duress. Guess not, huh.

So, to be clear, it is OK with you to deny others due process as long we are the good guys. Right?

Regards,

Joe S.

How you came to that conclusion is beyond me. But, I can live with that.

While we are on the subject of due process ..."Double tap regards"? Is there a facet of due process I am missing?

Miss Malkin in an erudite, educated conservative but she is a bit left of my thoughts on gitmo. I would give each of the detainees a summary court martial and a first class hanging. Then they can close the place.